Thursday, May 21, 2009

I gotta say, I am at a loss on this Guantanamo closure thing. Have any of you all seen one tiniest bit of argument about why we can't have the alleged terrorists in prisons in the United States? I mean I can think of arguments, but I haven't seen them. It seems that most people seem are intimating that it is a safety issue, as in "I don't want them in my state!" Is that it? Because that makes no sense. It's not like our maximum security prisons are being escaped from every day. Are people afraid that their state would become a target of a terrorist attack? Is that it? Somebody help me out here.

And while I am here, I might say that while I was born a Democrat and I will die a Democrat, that doesn't mean I can't be ashamed of being a Democrat when we have "leaders" like the ones we currently have. Will somebody in my party grow a fucking backbone and do the right fucking thing every once in a while?

EZ, you love to defend the party in all matters, what do you got to say about Pelosi and Reid?

4 comments:

The most plausible explanation I've seen is that most Dems are some combination of super-skittish of being called soft on Terror and really believe this shit. They seem to be reacting in a completely knee-jerk fashion, not having done any research whatsoever.

The fact that Reid jumped out there so quickly the other day so forcefully saying (then again he says even the most inane things 'forcefully' doesn't he?) that Congress wasn't going to let it happen, told me they had polled the issue.

Usually when you see a bunch of politicians (of any stripe) jumping in line on something, seemingly out of nowhere, means that they have done some focus grouping on it.

Probably they found out that if there is a chance that the US courts would allow Kalihd to walk free, out of a federal courthouse in say Detroit, Americans would go ballistic.

Remember that if there is no other obvious reason to explain a politician's behavior then assume it is self preservation.

I wouldn't say that I defend my party in "all matters".... e.g. I didn't support the widespread use of caucuses during the primary. I didn't support their capitulation to any of the GWOT crap....That said, I can and will defend Pelosi, and to a lesser extent Reid.

I appreciated your arguments at nwrethug re: truth commission for all who were involved in the approval of torture. What Pelosi knew or was briefed on is secondary (at least) to an investigation into those heinous actions.I haven't heard Pelosi's pos. on closing gitmo, but I saw that Reid softened his early week declaration on no $$$ for such closure. The party is still largely controlled from the center, and thus awful people like baucus and landrieu, and blanche lincoln (in Walmart's pocket) can demand concessions on any and all issues....

I am frakin pissed at BHO for capitulating on military commissions, indefinite detention, not releasing info, defending bush admin action, ruling out criminal prosecutions...etc...but I luv me sum Dem party....The one thing I won't do, is allow the RW media to throw BS hissy fits that they don't even believe themselves and consider those issues in their frame...I am proud of Pelosi as the highest ranking woman in the country, and I think she has done some good work, and Reid (a pro life mormon) is the head of a very conservative dem senate,and he still manages to not piss me off on most days...

Ireland is supposed to be taking in some of the Guantanamo detainees, on the assumption that they won't all want to go and live in the country that interned them for however many years. the Irish Times had a poll on its website and the response was, uh, decidedly mixed. part of it was kneejerk scaremongering/prejudice, but some of it was also "hey, it's their [your] mess, why should we deal with it" - which is why Obama has to resettle some of them domestically, else Europe et al have no obligation to take any themselves. anyone asked why they don't go back to their own homes? (don't worry, I can think of the answer to that)

I think Lex wants me to read some heavy French tome before using the word 'populism', but public opinion on matters of criminal justice (how it is perceived, regardless how you read the politics of the camp + trials) tends to be pretty reactive, right? so I can see where the pressure is coming from there, notwithstanding the wrongness of those opinions.